This topic area focuses on youth aged 14-24 who have not recently been in school or the labor force. In particular, CLEAR identified research that examined interventions to provide opportunities for youth to improve their labor market outcomes. This includes research describing these interventions and their implementation, along with studies of the interventions’ effectiveness.
Opportunities for Youth
Status: Literature reviewed in this topic area currently covers 1992 - 2015.
Synthesis Reports
Synthesis reports look at the research evidence across studies within a topic area. They also highlight gaps in the literature, and suggest areas in which further research is needed.
201
Findings:
Research provides strong evidence that NGYCP improves the educational outcomes of at-risk youth.
There is also strong evidence that NGYCP improves the labor market outcomes of at-risk youth.
A cost-benefit analysis found NGYCP produced large positive benefits.
NGYCP is a multi-component intervention, with little evidence on the effectiveness of specific components.
View full synthesis report: Evidence on the Effectiveness of the National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program
522
Findings:
Successful programs often involved a substantial time commitment from participating youth.
Many successful programs involved a job placement component or job search assistance.
Positive impacts tended to be realized in the short term and fade over time.
More information is needed on the replicability of some programs.
View full synthesis report: Research Synthesis: Opportunities for Youth
Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 102
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of One Summer Chicago Plus (OSC+) on education, employment, and earnings outcomes. This profile focuses on the 2012 eight-week intervention. The…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of One Summer Chicago Plus (OSC+) on education, employment, and earnings outcomes. This profile focuses on the 2013 six-week intervention. The authors…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Year Up program on long-term earnings. The study used a randomized controlled trial to assign participants to the Year Up program or the…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
This report’s objective was to examine the effectiveness of the Center for Employment Training (CET) model. Under this model, local employers helped to design training programs and provide them in a…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Back on Track framework on obtaining a high school credential and being disconnected from both work and school. The authors investigated similar…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Back on Track framework on earning a high school credential and being disconnected from both work and school (that is, neither working nor…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Back on Track framework on obtaining a high school credential and being disconnected from both work and school (that is, neither working nor…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Back on Track framework on earning a high school credential and being disconnected from both work and school (that is, neither working nor…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Independent Living Services (ILS) on high school graduation, post-secondary educational attainment, and full-time employment. Using survey and…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of YouthBuild AmeriCorps programs that grant both a HSE and Diploma (Combined HSE/Diploma) on employment, and education and training. The authors…
CLEAR Icon Key
Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.
High Causal Evidence
Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence
Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence
Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis
Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis
Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis
Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable
Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.